U2 have finally found what they are looking for: mediocrity?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
That article reads like interference complaints and gripes about the band.

Sent from my AT300 using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Same arguments read elsewhere.

PS: While not giving a fig about Oscars and stuff like that, I think it's depressing to read U2 aficionados who almost seemed to enjoy that OL lost in order to reiterate their arguments.
I'm of the impression that everyone has the right of like or loathe this U2 era, but the frustration that emerges when these people talk about it, which is distinctive, makes you wonder why they still care.

(my two cents)
 
It really does get tiring reading the same thing over and over again. Why was this posted?

And U2 aren't ready to be lumped with The Stones or Springsteen yet. Ordinary Love has been doing well on iTunes and even made it into the Hot 100!! Aside from last album, which was [commercially] disappointing, they haven't missed the mark in quite some time. Let's at least wait and see how the singles from the new album come along.
 
And U2 aren't ready to be lumped with The Stones or Springsteen yet. Ordinary Love has been doing well on iTunes and even made it into the Hot 100!! Aside from last album, which was [commercially] disappointing, they haven't missed the mark in quite some time. Let's at least wait and see how the singles from the new album come along.

Losing at 2003 Oscars brought them a heavy truck of luck with HTDAAB the year after. :D
 
It really does get tiring reading the same thing over and over again. Why was this posted?

What you meant to say is that it gets tiring reading criticism of your favorite band. Understandable. The same points get repeated because they are poignant and applicable.
 
I read a recent article where a tigress is wandering around India killing villagers, body count of like 10 or so. Once she got the taste of human she decided that was the way of the gun for her, and now they track her and live in fear in their villages and huts.

Didn't Larry once have injections of tiger blood? Or maybe that was Charlie Sheen. I hope he doesn't go around killing village people in India, though they dressed like the village people once.

I think Larry must be the Yellow King
 
That article kicked ass for all the wrong reasons. There's nothing wrong with wanting to be relevant and successful. It's as if 'successful' is a dirty word these days.

Reminds me of the time when 'selling out' was taboo...and then Nirvana and Green Day and all those other 'punk' bands exploded in the 90's and then it was about not living the 'rock star' life style (I'm pointing my finger at you Eddie Vedder). Funny, didn't Eddie just marry a model...:hmm:

Whatever, if U2 wants to challenge the state of music this day, and land on the charts then kudos to them. I, for one, thought that NLOTH was a little self indulgent. I love some songs on it, but for the most part it left me feeling a bit flat. The 360 Tour turned out to be a retrospective tour and lost some of the intimacy for me (well that, and because it was a HUGE production).

So I like OL and Invisible...songs with heart and emotion. Telling a story that we can all relate to in one way or another. I mean, Unknown Caller...:scratch:...I love the guitar solo, but the lyrics did not do anything for me. Eno and Lanois are geniuses, but it's time to change it up. I look forward to the Danger Mouse produced album...and whatever else the decide to drop on us...:applaud:

As for this article...:shrug:...it's his (and some other's) opinion and he certainly entitled to it. However he, like a LOT of other fans who love Pop, thinks its U2 by numbers since then, which is an insult to this band.
 
What you meant to say is that it gets tiring reading criticism of your favorite band. Understandable. The same points get repeated because they are poignant and applicable.



No, it's not what I meant.

Just as I wouldn't want to keep reading/posting 100s of articles about how good AB is if they were all pretty much the same. Electric, gritty, daring, change of sounds, etc. After about 10 its all the same. You don't really see people posting things like that, do you?

I'd happily read a criticism that was something I haven't heard already. I'm don't want to read the same book over and over again, I've already got it memorized.
 
Maybe I am generalising here but it seems that the kneejerk reaction to an uncomplimentary article around here is to ridicule the publication or the place or the writer. I hate hearing criticisms of U2 as much as the next guy, especially as the guys seem to be in a vulnerable position right now, what with them being 50+ and currency an increasingly elusive beast. But I think there were some good points in there. I like Invisible, am not unhappy with OL and anyway its a soundtrack song, but U2 chasing hits has worried me recently.
The leadup to this album has had good and bad signs IMO. I liked hearing Edge saying that a song must be able to hold its own when stripped down to an acoustic arrangement -- that means that melody is going to be important, the idea of the song may have primacy as it did on Joshua Tree. I also liked Bono sayin that they are giving each song a lot of test drives to know just what the right arrangement will be. If they had done that on NLOTH then we may not have had to hear the lyric 'Sexy Boots' in a U2 song. Both of these are examples of the band's creative sensitivity which, having been a long time fan I will always trust.
I am more suspicious of Bono's and the band's tendency to sort of disown an album that hasnt done well in the mainstream. That is not the artist speaking, its the businessmen and I may be wrong, but U2 has no business in business. I liked NLOTH better than HTDAAB but it may have been the first U2 record which did not yield a mainstream hit (the likes of MOS and Magnificent were fan favourites but they werent a Vertigo or COBL). I think that scares the band at this stage and that scares me because U2 seem to be at their best when exploring, not following the beaten path. I dont think they are mediocre or either of the two songs so far are mediocre. That part I disagree with, but I don't think the writer is way off the mark in being concerned about Bono's comments vis a vis NLOTH

Sent from my GT-I9300 using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Aside from "Moment Of Surrender" (to some extent) ... which was the last U2 Song which you would call "epic" ...

Is "Being Born" an epic song? Is "Unknown Caller" an epic song? Is "City Of Blinding Lights" .... epic?

I mean those mentioned songs are not bad ... COBL is a nice uplifting song .. Beautiful Day is euphoric .. which I also like ..

If I were in a position to pronounce a wish ... that would be .. just write some epic songs ... what is epic? For me ... that's in the lines of "Unforgettable Fire", "New Year's Day" ... "Acrobat" ... "Bad" ... "Running To Stand Still" ... "Love Is Blindness" ... "Ultraviolet" .. you get the picture.

I have no problem with U2 wanting some "hits" .. but they have to come up with some real mind goggling, brain f*#ing stuff to be "relevant" .. for me
 
:lol: oh, is that all?

Yes .. that IS all.

U2 just have to be epic - I loved them because of their Epicness.

I mean who wants U2 to be anything else but EPIC?

I can listen to Ordinary Love or Invisible without crying like a Chrissy Martin, there must be something wrong !
 
Telling a story that we can all relate to in one way or another. I mean, Unknown Caller...:scratch:...I love the guitar solo, but the lyrics did not do anything for me.

Interesting. I really relate to the themes of isolation and disconnection is a crowded and hyperconnected world quite a lot. The lyrics don't operate well independently from the music, but in combination they make a stream of consciousness kind of impression that I find very, very emotionally effective.
 
Back
Top Bottom